Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Zdenek Kotala
Subject Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)
Date
Msg-id 4922DE3C.1090001@sun.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: Re: toast by chunk-end (was Re: PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION 5 - time for change)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a):
> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas napsal(a):
>>> Zdenek Kotala wrote:
>>>> Just a very quick look on your patch. See my comments:
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> 2) PG_PAGE_LAYOUT_VERSION should be bump
>>>
>>> The patch doesn't change the page layout AFAICS.
>>>
>>
>> It is good question what is and what is not page layout. I think that 
>> toast implementation is a member of page layout. OK it is called page 
>> layout but better name should be On Disk Format (ODF). You will not 
>> able to read 8.3 toasted table in 8.4.
> 
> It's clearly just a catalog change; the number and meaning of attributes 
> has changed, and that's reflected in CATALOG_VERSION_NO.

If I'm thinking more, it is not probably CATALOG_VERSION_NO as well. Because 
toast table is created on demand. It is not in BKI.

Maybe we should add something like TOAST_VERSION.

Do we bump catalog version when AM bump version?
    Zdenek


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: Updated posix fadvise patch v19
Next
From: "Robert Haas"
Date:
Subject: Re: is any reason why only one columns subselect are allowed in array()?